We have reduced support for legacy browsers.

What does this mean for me? You will always be able to play your favorite games on Kongregate. However, certain site features may suddenly stop working and leave you with a severely degraded experience.

What should I do? We strongly urge all our users to upgrade to modern browsers for a better experience and improved security.

> *Originally posted by **[lock\_of\_fear](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=39#posts-6443752):***
> > *Originally posted by **[softest\_voice](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=39#posts-6443738):***
> >
> > Ya know, you’d feel “smug” and “arrogant”, too, if you were facing a debate opponent you _knew_ was completely full of shit.
> >
> > I’m a real policy wonk and math guy.
> > /Paul Ryan
> > The policy and math is too complicated to explain to you.
> >
> > Fuckin LOL
>
> Holy crap! [Paul Ryan refuses to explain how much the cut will cost! If you lower tax rates WITHOUT closing loop holes.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PM66-SxHDu0) Who’s going to trust the math exists if refuses to say how much they intend to regain by closing loop holes? I still don’t respect Fox, but I think I just became a fan of Paul Ryan.
As if it matters. His plans will change next week anyway just like all their plans. The biggest flip flopping team of the century.

> *Originally posted by **[karmakoolkid](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=39#posts-6443578):***
> > *Originally posted by **[BobTheCoolGuy](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=39#posts-6443355):***
> >
> > The point is that Biden thought he was always getting less time, when he really was getting more time.
>
> THAT remains to be “proven”. Unless someone has some info to show this to be true.
> LOL, they needed to use one of those timers chess players use.
>
>
> > He appeared petty and at times outright rude.
>
> I might even toss in a tad of arrogant. I feel that it might..MIGHT have hurt his position….of course, I’m talking about the opinions of those “undecideders”. Obviously, each camp will see it differently.
>
>
>
> But, such is the “nature” of political rhetoric…esp today (as opposed to a couple of decades ago).
>
>
> > Maybe Ryan was spewing crap, but then again, Biden was too.Not according to independent analysts.
Karma, if you watch the debates on CNN they have a running timer, actually quite similar to a chess timer type deal, except it counts up instead of down. You can even watch the replay on CNN now I’m sure. I agree with you on the arrogance – it didn’t put him in a good light to voters. I think Romney did a good job in the first debate of being aggressive but not going overboard. Biden attempted the same thing but took it too far.
Also, unless you’re wearing blue tinted glasses, I think you can tell that they [both stretch the truth](http://factcheck.org/2012/10/veep-debate-violations/)

I think substance of statements and falsehoods is interesting here.
Ryan repeatedly made blatantly wrong and disproven comments.
Biden was also wrong on a number of things, but a few of those at least were arguably semantic.

> *Originally posted by **[BobTheCoolGuy](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6443977):***
>
> Also, unless you’re wearing blue tinted glasses, I think you can tell that they [both stretch the truth](http://factcheck.org/2012/10/veep-debate-violations/)
After carefully reading the article I have concluded your right. The Obama administration should stop claiming Romny’s tax plan is a tax cut for the wealthy and a tax hike for the middle class. Especially when they can prove that the plan while it has noble intentions is mathematically impossible. I suppose if I actually thought you could cut taxes in a revenue neutral manner like that I’d be getting behind them too.
> *Originally posted by **[Fact check .org:](http://factcheck.org/2012/10/veep-debate-violations/)***
> “Biden quoted Romney as saying that he would not “move heaven and earth” to get Osama bin Laden. What Romney said was that he’d go after other terrorists as well.
This is really unacceptable.
On the other hand Ryan claimed six studies supported that the math for the tax policy would work out. None do.
> *Originally posted by **[Fact check .org:](http://factcheck.org/2012/10/veep-debate-violations/)***
>
> [We wrote about this before](http://factcheck.org/2012/09/romneys-economic-exaggerations-2/) when Romney and Ryan referred to “five different studies.” At that time, we wrote that one of those “studies” was a blog item (not a study), one was a campaign white paper coauthored by Romney’s chief economic adviser, and one was a newspaper op-ed written by yet another campaign adviser who later updated his calculations in a blog item. Romney and Ryan counted the updated blog item as a “study.”
>
> The fifth study was written by Harvey Rosen, a Princeton economics professor who once served as chairman of President George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers. Rosen assumes Romney’s tax plan would add an extra 3 percent to the economy — an assumption that Rosen calls “reasonable.” But Romney’s plan is designed to be revenue neutral, so it would not reduce the tax burden on the economy and, presumably, would have less of a growth effect. Bush’s large tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, for example, did reduce the overall tax burden and yet the year-to-year changes to the real GDP were just over 2 percent.
if you read the small business smackdown section of the [link](http://factcheck.org/2012/10/veep-debate-violations/). You can see Ryan includes hedge funds in his statement about small business and supports his statement that it would cost jobs with a partisan study that doesn’t cover the exact case in question.

> As if it matters. His plans will change next week anyway just like all their plans. The biggest flip flopping team of the century.
The biggest flip flopping team which has NO chance at all at winning thanks to the Electoral College.

> *Originally posted by **[JaumeBG](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6444453):***
> > As if it matters. His plans will change next week anyway just like all their plans. The biggest flip flopping team of the century.
>
> The biggest flip flopping team which has NO chance at all at winning thanks to the Electoral College.
The electoral College system is not the only thing at fault here.
I do feel that the electoral college system, is a distorting force on the election. Under the current system I feel my vote doesn’t count. I live in New York state which barring events I can’t imagine happening will vote democratic. Thus if I where to switch my vote it effectively wouldn’t change the result. The popular vote doesn’t matter. The electoral vote is what elects a president and if I where to swap my vote that electoral vote count wouldn’t change not even by 0.00001% I wish it would.
* * *
> *Originally posted by **[JaumeBG](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=39#posts-6441766):***
>
> What I dislike is how the media treats the debates. Right after the debate on ABC all they talked about was whether Biden smiling so much was good or not, and other such topics. Exactly the same as in the last debate, they do not focus on the contents of the debate or what is said.
I’d like to know what you think of the [PBS vice presidential debate discussion.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1iB0l0Yp20&feature=plcp) alternatively you could just watch the one [slightly amusing moment.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1iB0l0Yp20&t=9m56s)

> *Originally posted by **[JaumeBG](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6444453):***
> > As if it matters. His plans will change next week anyway just like all their plans. The biggest flip flopping team of the century.
>
> The biggest flip flopping team which has NO chance at all at winning thanks to the Electoral College.
The polls beg to differ:
[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012\_elections\_electoral\_college\_map.html](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html)

Issendorf, according to those polls:
![](http://i.imgur.com/bCSxh.png)
The result ends up being:
![](http://i.imgur.com/wgFO3.png)
* * *
On the top of the page, where there are several polls where Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire show up as Republican: those polls can be easily dismissed, since the majority of polls apart from a few indicate Democrat.
![](http://i.imgur.com/vUxbH.png)
Michigan:
![](http://i.imgur.com/cpEm6.png)
Pennsylvania:
![](http://i.imgur.com/zIMNY.png)
Wisconsin:
![](http://i.imgur.com/Ewk0Y.png)
New Hampshire, which could (according to the latest polls) go either way:
![](http://i.imgur.com/FmOMf.png)
So, with the information **you** have provided, and saying New Hampshire will vote Republican (which I can show you dozens of polls saying otherwise—but here we’re just basing stats on those polls), the vote becomes favourable for Obama:
![](http://i.imgur.com/AkXYm.png)

Even though Biden has been portrayed as a hapless fool (mostly by his own fault) I was impressed with his strong performance in the debate. He’s a lot smarter and tougher than I had expected. Same goes with Romney with his last debate, he surprised me as well.

Difference being, everything Biden said wasn’t categorically false.
LOL @ conservatives getting all offended by Joe’s arrogant attitude;
After four years of nut jobs screaming about birth certificates, carrying rifles to political rallies, and screaming about secret Muslim plots…I’d laugh at the asshole too.
Sorry, but I’ve lost all respect for the “conservative” movement in this country.
You guys have let the inmates take control of the asylum.
You need a good solid dry spell to get yourselves reorganized.
To let the old bad blood die off.
Talk to me when your party’s not openly saying their only goal is to prevent the other guy getting re-elected.

First of all JaumeBG, all of those graphs and estimates are outdated and lean to the left. The rest of you liberals keep talking, knowing you are losing more everyday. The election is less than a month away and if the polls weren’t skewed there would be a different picture emerging. You all think the American people are so happy with an economy that is flat, but I have news for you, they aren’t. We, and I mean the majority of voters, are pissed because we have lost almost everything. Retirement money we were looking forward to in our later years…gone. Our homes (millions)…gone. Our jobs…gone.
Now I predicted the unemployment rate would fall and now will tell you how it fell. California just happened to not make the deadline for their unemployment data to be counted. Convenient? Then I told you the economy would all of a sudden show growth. Well, inexplicably it has made a major improvement. Coincidence? These are election year politics and I have seen them every election for about 60 years.
You can all jump up and down and claim Obama a saint, but the people aren’t convinced. I have heard a lot of interviews of voters who are fed up with what Obama has done. The only thing left for him is to manipulate the votes. I’m sorry, but Romney is going to win.
Oh and Softest…that voter you are pocking fun at is a sure vote. You better worry about him and his bunch. In all of the news that interviewed people today, most of them didn’t like Biden’s arrogance. It turned them off and they felt he was not only arrogant to Ryan, but felt that way toward the voter. Very poor move on his part.

> First of all JaumeBG, all of those graphs and estimates are outdated and lean to the left.
Some indicate results positive to Romney. And hell, all in the south sure do.
You have no proof in your claim that these polls all lean to the left—apart from your denialism.
You did not check the polls at all. [Ohio: polls range from October 4 to 10](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html); [VA: October 4–11](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/va/virginia_romney_vs_obama-1774.html); [FL: October 1–11](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html); [WI: October 4–9](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/wi/wisconsin_romney_vs_obama-1871.html); [CO: October 3–10](www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/co/colorado_romney_vs_obama-2023.html); etc. These are the latest polls available and are not outdated.
The polls range from Rasmussen Reports to ARG, from WeAskAmerica to NBC, from PPP to Quinnipiac, and even the University of Denver. Please tell me how the University of Denver is not a reputable source and is biased to the left. Please tell me how Rasmussen Reports is not a reputable source and is biased to the left. Please tell me how Quinnipiac is not a reputable source and is biased to the left. You won’t; you can’t. Denialism on your behalf yet again—surprising!
As you can’t, I can only conclude that Issendorf’s source and the series of links and sources coming from there are reputable.
> The rest of you liberals keep talking, knowing you are losing more everyday.
Losing more every day just recently because of the presidential debate. It will soon rise again. And if it does not, then Obama still has a majority.
* * *
jhco, honestly (I know you won’t, but I’ll ask you to do it anyway), please tell me which swing states Romney will win giving him a majority of the Electoral College.
You keep discussing policies, and we have replied concerning what you have to say. However, you never discuss the mathematics of the election, do you?

> First of all JaumeBG, all of those graphs and estimates are outdated and lean to the left.
In fact the problem is that they are undated. There is no link.
Edit: Whoops, never mind.
But I imagine you would not be protesting too much if they leaned to the right. Then that would reflect the capital-t truth and not just liberal skewing of the ‘facts’, right?
> I’m sorry, but Romney is going to win.
That sounds like a wager. Loser makes an apologize thread. I’m not ideally placed for that (given I don’t care which one wins), but perhaps softest…
> Oh and Softest…that voter you are pocking fun at is a sure vote. You better worry about him and his bunch.
I believe that was the point, given that ‘his bunch’ look like redneck skinheads.

JaumeBG I can’t predict details such as that. I can only predict the election as a whole, using past experience of what I have seen. To be honest, I thought Hillary would win the presidential election instead of Obama. I didn’t expect McCain to win. He blew it early and then never recovered. Romney is in Ohio now and from what I just heard on the radio, he is drawing humongous crowds to his speeches.
Jaume, people have had four years of this recession. they are tired and broke. I don’t think they want another four years of the same, in fact I don’t think our country can survive another four years.
The polls are off my foreign friend. as I said before the polls the last week before the election are the ones you want to watch. Right now they are part of a game.

> *Originally posted by **[Jantonaitis](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6445464):***
> > Oh and Softest…that voter you are pocking fun at is a sure vote. You better worry about him and his bunch.
>
> I believe that was the point, given that ‘his bunch’ look like redneck skinheads.
Yes, I’m not convinced that having the ‘cast iron’ solid backing of the white supremicist front is something Romney should be proud of. Or indeed try to advertise…at all.

> *Originally posted by **[jhco50](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6445490):***
>
> Jaume, people have had four years of this recession. they are tired and broke. I don’t think they want another four years of the same, in fact I don’t think our country can survive another four years.
Because Romney could totally take the countrie’s economy out of the crapper in under four years, right?

> In fact the problem is that they are undated. There is no link.
[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012\_elections\_electoral\_college\_map.html](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html)
That’s the link issendorf provided, and the link I replied to. I made the graphs and images myself, the Electoral College votes images with help from [The New York Times Electoral Map](http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/electoral-map).
To access information on states, click on each state.

> *Originally posted by **[Jantonaitis](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6445464):***
> > First of all JaumeBG, all of those graphs and estimates are outdated and lean to the left.
>
> In fact the problem is that they are undated. There is no link.
> Edit: Whoops, never mind.
>
> But I imagine you would not be protesting too much if they leaned to the right. Then that would reflect the capital-t truth and not just liberal skewing of the ‘facts’, right?
>
> > I’m sorry, but Romney is going to win.
>
> That sounds like a wager. Loser makes an apologize thread. I’m not ideally placed for that (given I don’t care which one wins), but perhaps softest…
>
> > Oh and Softest…that voter you are pocking fun at is a sure vote. You better worry about him and his bunch.
>
> I believe that was the point, given that ‘his bunch’ look like redneck skinheads.
I don’t trust them no matter which way they lean. They are actually showing Romney ahead of Obama, within the % of error. It doesn’t mean a thing to me.
I already have that wager with Tenco and JaumeBG. Of course you can be in on it. I will make it open to the liberals. IF I lose. But I expect one from the libs if I win.
Well, no matter what his point is, he and his bunch are voters and they count. Maybe Obama should have shaved his head and offered them some government freebe.

> JaumeBG I can’t predict details such as that.
You can, there are polls for that very reason.
> I can only predict the election as a whole,
As you may remember from 2000, the election as a whole does not matter at all. Although I very much doubt Romney will win the popular vote but lose the electoral vote like Gore did.
> he is drawing humongous crowds to his speeches.
Obama is drawing humongous crowds to his speeches too; that is irrelevant.
All I am saying is that you are dismissing the mathematics of this election.

> *Originally posted by **[jhco50](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6445505):***
>
> I already have that wager with Tenco and JaumeBG.
Wait, was I drunk when I agreed to that, because it seems like something I would do when I’m drunk.
> Well, no matter what his point is, he and his bunch are voters and they count. Maybe Obama should have shaved his head and offered them some government freebe.
I don’t think you’re quite getting the part where having groups like that support you isn’t good P.R. (As in, you’d probably _lose_ voters too, because of that.)

> *Originally posted by **[tenco1](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6445496):***
> > *Originally posted by **[jhco50](/forums/9/topics/289927?page=40#posts-6445490):***
> >
> > Jaume, people have had four years of this recession. they are tired and broke. I don’t think they want another four years of the same, in fact I don’t think our country can survive another four years.
>
> Because Romney could totally take the countrie’s economy out of the crapper in under four years, right?
If, and that is a big if, Obama’s policies were going to work there should have been some sign the first two years. Yet here we are, four years later, and nothing. It is time for Obama to go. His policies didn’t work and now we want some new ideas.